When England lost the Ashes, as usual many fingers were pointed at our domestic structure - particularly a marginalised Championship.

Yet we have degraded the 50 over game much more, it gets absolute bottom billing in the season, most of it is played out in May-early June - any player at a club not qualifying plays just 8 days a year at first-team level and it's over and done for them on June 7.

So, when we succeed at ODIs we can hardly say it's down to the great domestic set-up.

User mini profile

Think that T20 skills are more readily transferred to the ODI format than either of the two short formats are to Test cricket.

So it's not as simple as looking at the domestic 50 over game which if anything has largely become redundant because of T20, and will only become more so as it will effectively be played by second teams squad cricketers when it classes with the franchises in a couple of years time.

Isn't it also that despite efforts from certain quaters people do care about the Test performance, so there are endless post mortems and attempts to allocate blame for failure, but if we fail at an ODI series or competition any similar attempts at an uprising are easily put down and forgotten as soon as there is a Test match (series) win.

User mini profile

I think as you say, the concern is in fact that with Tests there are "attempts" to find someone or something to blame, even if there is little or no conclusive evidence. It's verification of a pre-determined stance, not an in-depth analysis.